Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 15:53:35 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> Cc: FreeBSD current users <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: jail getfsstat patches. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.53.0406271521050.89503@e0-0.zab2.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <20040627101951.GJ12007@darkness.comp.waw.pl> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0406251809530.1679-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <20040627101951.GJ12007@darkness.comp.waw.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 27 Jun 2004, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: Hi, first of all a BIG THANK YOU to Robert for the very detailed description. > On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 08:59:32AM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > +> If you give me a few days (maybe I'll be ready today) I'll try to prepare > +> patch to commit so we can review it together. > > Ok, here it goes: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/jail_enforce_statfs.patch many thanks for the work; fetch says 17kb; looks like a very good abstraction and also includes patches for the emulations; great. I will look at this in detail. One thing that I have seen while skipping through the first time: could we avoid the function calls for non-jails or with jail_enforce_statfs=0 ? This would make the code somewhat longer as this part would be copied over multiple functions if (jailed(cred) && jail_enforce_statfs) { /* call of the two functions */ } (perhaps use a macro ?) but save people outside jails, w/o jails or with jail_enforce_statfs=0 the function calls. To answer another question: though I maybe thought/said s.th. else in the past I would like to keep the sysctl global and not have it per jail (if we start doing per-jail things we might really consider vimages (perhaps in 6-CURRENT) but that's out of the scope of this discussion). -- Greetings Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.53.0406271521050.89503>